An anonymous source (Thanks a lot!) just shared a new info about the new Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 SSM lens. He said the lens price will be a tiny bit over $1,500! This is double the price of the manual Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 lens that is available for Canon or Nikon mount (here at amazon). But of course this lens has AF, SSM and is weather sealed!
Now, as I told you this is from one anonymous source and the info may not be correct. But, let’s imagine that is the real final price:
[poll id=”138″]
—
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
143 Responses
For that price I have no problem pushing this lens to the back of my roadmap. $1299.00, I would be all over it!
$1,299 for a 50 mm lens? WOW! You must be very rich!! 🙂
yeahh that’s grazy, not reasonable price for 50mm/1.4 :p
i think the reasonable price is between $800-$1000 🙂
moreover A-mount is dying so that $1500 not reasonable price for 50mm/1.4 lens. remember 50mm/1.4 relative easy to make and not use high cost than 24mm/1.4, 35mm/1.4, 85mm/1.4 or else 🙂
Yeah!? A mount is dying? Why do they bother to make it?
I don’t think this rumor is correct. It would be very strange if 50/1.4 has almost the same price as 85/1.4
Surre but this Gould have SSM
I would be happy to spend that if the lens is real good, but not till Sony fills us in on its plans for full-frame A-mount photography.
I already have a $12,000 investment in A-Mount optics at current prices, and I’m becoming reluctant to add to that till I have better understanding of Sony’s plans for the mount.
+1
The roadmap for my hard earned £££ has no Sony stops on it.
I totally agree. It felt like betting on a dead horse as I had to add another A-mount lens recently…
Steve, why do you need a road map for A mount? Canon and Nikon both don’t have it. Are you saying that you need a road map before buying anything? Then, Neither Canon Nikon and Sony will be your choice?
Don’t let the mirrorless FF Nex rumor get over your head, cuz that never means they won’t develop a mirrorless A mount. Maybe later than the Nex but they will do it and it will only be better after they learn from the FF Nex.
Well… With a new/update (FF) lens and body every few months, nobody would assume that Nikon and Canon will let there systems die. On the other hand, the last exciting thing we saw for FF A-Mount was the introduction of the 2.8/16-35 in 2008. The 2.0/24 (in 2010) and the 4.0/500 can be rather considered as the termination of long-running developments than new investments in the system. And I wouldn’t consider the a99 on par with the a900.
And now, out of the blue, an 1.4/50 mm Zeiss (cheap compared to the 6000 € Leica Summicron-M 2.0/50 mm). How shall I understand this? As a statement to go high-end/professional as the a900 appeared to be in 2008? Or as a one-day-wonder as the a900 turned out to be?
Mee too! Please Sony keep it alive! An give me the A1, please.
OVERPRICED!!!
Weather sealed? SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!!!
It’s still a Planar. How much better can it be compared to others?
For a 50mm f1.4? Yeah no thanks. IF it is that price it is purely Sony playing us as suckers, no other way to try and pretend like it is a good deal, or worth the money. Though we do need to pay the Sony tax…
хахаххахаа Andrea!!! price 900!!!
(SR5) price 899$ !!!
Im sure this lens will be superb, but that price does seem a tad excessive. Oh well, it’s a rumor for now, so it can be ten grand for all I care.
On a side note, I’m very happy to see weather sealing is becoming a new standard for Sony. Better late then never.
As I remember, manual Zeiss Planar 50/1.5 for Contax/Yashica was priced at $275 or even $250 (much less than Canon EOS analog!)
…70-200 and 70-400 what, next year?
Then i prefer 85mm zeiss…
Let’s have a look at Carl Zeiss prime lenses and their prices:
SAL24F20Z $1.399
SAL85F14Z $1.699
SAL135F18Z $1.799
So, it is easy to figure out where SAL50F14Z will fall. Actually, since it will come with SSM, it is very unlikely to think this lens will be cheaper than $1.500. My guess is $1.599 and I would never buy a 50mm at this price.
No, it will be priced below the 24mm f2 SSM as a 50mm 1,4 is way easier to build as a 24mm for a camera with a flange back distance of 44,5mm.
Exactly. A 50 is easier to design, build, and can be produced at a higher scale compared any 24 and 85. Price should be well below $1200, you can’t sell a 50 f1.4 at the price of a f1.2 unless you are Leica or… Maybe Zeiss?
SSM and weather sealing should not count too much, they should be priced in at a lower level than 1500.
these are not extra features of the new 50mm, but they were simply missing on the other lenses.
BTW the 85mm is pretty much weather sealed as is, even if Sony does not claim it is.
I took mine under pouring rain quite a few times and nothing really happens. And I have seen reports from other people having done the same without damage.
The same price at the 85mm is realistic. the new 50mm got SSM and weather sealed, so off couse it cost some more. And still, Carl Zeiss is still the best image image quality.
Just see the Bokeh: http://neilvn.com/tangents/bokeh-sony-rx1-vs-nikon-35mmm-f1-4g/
This is ridiculous (… the price). Aren’t they able to do good products for decent price. They condemn their full frames DSLR (SLT) to fail again and again… till their end that looks very close.
We could take this more seriously if there was a need created by having a high resolution body available, in the 54 megapixel range. I suspect the current products would be fine even until the 36 megapixel range, but that a selection of great primes would be needed to make the most of a very high megapixel camera (and even a lower megapixel “layered-sensor” camera as those seem to perform much better than bayer sensors with the same, and higher, megapixel count).
Good point. This lens should be “future proof” when 54PM is here (2015?)
It should be cheaper than the 24mm
Agreed, the 50mm should be easier to design and cheaper to build than the 24mm. IMO they need to price it below the Canon 50mm f/1.2L (goes for $1300). $1200 would be my guess, for $900-$1000 they could actually sell quite a few. I don’t like 50mm that much, I prefer 35 and 100/135mm on FF, 24mm and 85mm on APS-C.
Too expensive ! It is only a 50mm… even if with a super quality, a fast autofocus, 50mm is not the most difficult lens to built !
Maybe I gonna say hello to Sigma 50 F1.4…
I see no way this zeiss will be 2x as good as the Sigma 50 1.4. No way. The weather sealing isn’t worth 2x the money in my opinion.
Don’t forget at top performance range, even a 10% differences will cause you 4 times the price. Performance and price is not always proportional.
On their latest trip to Antarctica where they tested several brands in harsh weather, Luminous Landscape noted that the non-weather sealed Sony equiment outlasted weather sealed Canon equipment by a WIDE margin. Have a look at that article. I guess my point is that weather sealing if a fine thing to write on a brochure, but Sony’s superior construction rules. I’m sure Canon fanboys will beg to differ.
WOW, what a joke. a 50mm f/1.4 is a pretty simple lens, isn’t it?
Long live the sharp and bokehlicious Sigma 50mm f/1.4
I won’t buy this lens at all because the 72mm filter thread wouldn’t look nice on my NEX 😀
Andrea it’s not just a matter of price. If for the price, it turns out like being the best 50mm all around, then serious pros and amateurs will make the effort to buy it. I would do it for sure, in that case. But it has to be nearly perfect.
It would have to be sharp at the full frame corners wide open, no bokeh outlining, little to no vignetting, and minimal longitudinal (bokeh)CA. Basically, replicate the 135/1.8, but be even better.
I’d agree; for that price it would have to be superlative – significantly better than any other SLR option and the sort of lens that encourages people buy a camera to go with it
1,599 for a Planar 50/1.4? no way!
55/1.2 for such price would be considered as “cheap”!
I think 1,199 or 1,299 will be more acceptable!
Unless it’s a miniaturized Distagon 55/1.4, any price above 1000 is ridiculous.
For 1500 bucks it has to be “Leica good”.
I’ll wait the test of this lens. If it’s really more than 1500$ then it has to be really really good because i will not buy this only for zeiss name.
“Would you buy the lens if the image quality is on a very high level?”
Hell, no!
If this is Sony’s idea to make the Habbelsad Lunar attractive, it fails!
As I mentioned earlier, Leica M is looking very attractive, even in terms of pricing!
Of course Leica is very attractive… especially the white leather one at 25000 euros.
go ahead….
Thanks for the permission.:) That is a big relief!
I don’t get this. Where are you going to buy a 50 mm Leica ‘Lux for ~ 1500? You can buy 2-3 new Zeiss 50 mm for the price of one Leica 50 mm.
Maybe for an F1.0-F1.2 but not for F1.4.
+1
But, by no way I can afford $1,500.00 for a 50 mm 1.4.
+1
For everyone’s sake let’s hope it isn’t true
Sorry that is overpriced, though it wouldn’t be if it were f1.2. It just makes the Sigma 35mm f1.4 a no-brainer and I wouldn#t be surprised if Sigma do not release an updated 50mm f1.4 which is half the price of the forthcoming ZA and is a better performer
Well, slow down. How do you already know that Sigma 50mm is a better production? Did you test a pre-production sample? 😀
@Andy Pandy I have just got the Sigma 35mm F1.4 for my D800 and its performance is excellent it is a bonus that it is far cheaper than the Nikon alternative and a better performer.
I would be very surprised if it will cost that much.
f1.4 50mm lenses are generally 25% less expensive than 85mm and 20/24mm lenses, because they are easier to manufacture and design.
Neither one: the 24mm and 85mm CZ costs even 1500$.
There is not reason to expect this lens to be more than 1100$.
SR2 for this rumors is a good rating because it will very likely result in being total BS.
What about SSM and wheather sealing? They won’t come for free…
for current price of CZ 85mm and CZ 135mm, that lens should have SSM and weather sealing 🙂
Sure and a Leica M should have AF given it’s Price! I guess the Canikon guys would be happy to spend more if their Zeiss lenses have AF too!
Would you pay double the costs of a Manual focus lens for Autofocus with SSM + Image stabilization?
I would. Though, both prices are out of my range.
CAUTION ***caution*** CAUTION
for SONY…
No. (67%, 538 Votes)
Yes! (22%, 180 Votes)
Don’t know. (11%, 91 Votes)
The sad thing is, that 180 gives Sony more $$$ than the 538.
Saves them the trouble of making a lot of the lenses as well…
Without a clear fullframe strategy from Sony, I’ll stay put with the Zeiss lenses I have. (I suspect that the slow arrival of lenses is a hint that A mount full frame is dying)
There are three FULL FRAME E-mount lenses rumoured for June 2014 from Sony/Zeiss.
If they stuck an E-mount on the next generation of SLR sized bodies, it’s game over for a native A-mount camera. Sony will be throwing their full resources behind E-mount from 2014 I reckon.
+100
Such a shame!
I definitely prefer big glass.
Price might be more, AF might be slower, but there are usually less issues with artifacts.
Has anyone stuck a 135Z on a nex-6???
The price fits relative to the 85mm f1.4. And the 24mm is not an f1.4. So this may be the real price…
Canikon’s 50/1.4 is priced below $500, if this Zeiss 50/1.4 SSM is indeed listed above $1500 Sony is simply trying to be priced out of market. Period.
Uh, Sony has a 50mm F1.4 for less than $500 as well.
Canon’s 50mm Zeiss lens is $725, without SSM, autofocus, weather sealing or Image stabilization
These Zeiss lenses seem overrated. I compared the 24/1.8 to my old Olympus OM 24/2.8 on NEX-7. The Olympus lens was better at every aperture (except, of course, at f/1.8), and was sharper across the frame with fewer issues of any kind. You can buy one of those for $150-200 easily. The Zeiss lens does autofoucus of course, but that’s no big deal.
My Oly 50/1.8 beats the Sony 50/1.8 also, but I kept the Sony because the OSS is useful at times, and $300 is not an unreasonable price.
Apparently some people LIKE paying more in the mistaken belief that you get what you pay for.
I think you failed to see the obvious. You compared a lens with more than a stop slower than the other. And you forgot that you are using the sweet spot of the OM lens. People are buying fast lens because they want the flexibility, not because whether it’s better than a slower, easier to design lens.
No, I understand that perfectly, but the Zeiss is not really very good wide open to be honest. I am not saying it is not a good lens, I am saying that it is terribly overpriced. They seem to be selling a name and a logo, not performance. If you need an f/1.8 lens and intend to shoot it wide-open, perhaps the Zeiss is an OK option. As for the sweet spot, yes, of course, but all of that doesn’t matter. All that matters to me is the image, and I am saying that for 200 bucks you can get better optics than the overpriced Zeiss–not even OSS–UNLESS you need to shoot it wide-open.
You are open to buy any lens brand. That’s the price of Zessis, a combination of top notch performance and brand name. Would LV bags ever cheaper than Coachs’? Their quality is about the same.
Do the same comparison on a NEX5 or 6.
Everyone knows that the NEX7 has a sensor problem that can’t be compensated by any lens.
I have both the Sigma 19 and the 30, and like both lenses. I would like to see Sigma come out with a fast 50 for NEX, and also a long macro. And how about a compact 24/1.8.
But remember! We have in-body stabilizing, making our lenses cheaper… Oh wait, does it make them cheaper? Sony is abusing us
1.5k too much. I would buy for 1k no more.
Thank you Sony, for ensuring my Minolta lens collection gains value every time you release an expensive lens. Please, double the price on all your lenses. Be super exclusive and the priciest game around.
Everyone’s existing Alpha lens collection just became more valuable on used market, all thanks to the high price of this new 50/1.4ZA. Awesome!
Why won’t we just calm down? SR2 and already you’re heating up? 😀
easy 😀 there still alternatif lens for 50mm/1.4 like sony 50mm and sigma 50mm 😀 for sigma the optic and perform is really good, that two lens relative cheap price 🙂 so i think this new come sony CZ 50mm/1.4 will not affect minolta price except sal 50mm/1.4 discontinued by sony 🙂
All the ZA’s are top notch in their class… They don’t have any focus shift, compared to CaNikon best. No equivalent in ZF/ZE. ZA’s have extremely even performance across entire field of focus. Gorgeous exquisite OOFA too.
Face it folks, Alpha is an exclusive line of kit, with enormous selection of super high quality used glass for those who can’t afford newest new. Don’t expect Alpha to be an economy player with the ZA’s. We’re here because it’s there.
You make it sounds like elite brand, the reality is that camera snob tread Sony like Hyundai or Mazda in car word.
The RX1, a99, and ZA lens line would suggest differently.
Reviewers consistently rate these items as some of the most well made tools available. No reviewer says that about the Hyundai or Mazda. Your analogy is toothless.
Shut up, Mazda is the King!
Then, please explain to me that why the BMW (Nikon) is using Mazda (Sony) Engine (Sensor)
Sony should also update the today Sony 50mm F1.4 lens with SSM.
And sell it for a price as the Nikon/Canon etc 50mm F1.4
There got to be a cheap 50mm F1.4 option.
Just buy the Sigma 50mm f1.4 HSM, don’t bother waiting for Sony, it ain’t gonna happen.
I think the price should be around 1k. But why so worked up because of a SR2 rumor?
I’ve been trying to decide on an A99 with just 2 lenses (the Sigma 35/1.4 and the upcoming Zeiss 50/1.4) OR the RX1 while keeping my NEX 5N for other focal lengths. I wanted to wait and see how the Zeiss 50 performed wide open and how much it cost. If this rumor is true then I’ll just skip the A99 and get the RX1. ;~)
If I was a new user looking to get into FF it would be the D600 as a starting point. Dirt cheap and use the difference on good glass.
I owned a D600 for 2 weeks. The price was nice, but in many respects, it was a step backwards from my NEX 5N. So I returned it. I suppose if price was the biggest consideration then sure, it’s FF . . . but I didn’t want to be limited by using it for years.
But I returned it because it came with about 15 oil spots on the sensor (or whatever it is afflicting so many D600s).
+1
That’s why it’s dirty cheap. Cuz’ it’s dirty lol…
Then buy the next model up. The point is that the D600 is a step onto the full frame ladder, a significantly cheaper step too. It allows you to spend more on good glass. You don’t keep bodies for years, you keep the glass.
Depends on the body. I’ve kept every 9 series since 1985-ish? No plans on selling four year old a900. Doubt the D600 would last that long under my abuse.
Not that I’m disagreeing with you Frank. The D600 is indeed a good step into FF, and the glass collection is what gets built over time. I hear ya. Though I’m not convinced a new D600 is a better value than a used a900. Entry level cameras have entry level components. The a900 used is a very safe bet, tough like hockey puck. D600 has no bull work inside.
1’500.00 is crazy! Up to 800 I would buy it. They must have lost their mind …
Let just all tell Sony were going to buy a Sigma instead.
Or Nikon….
A77 – Is there anyway to assign the Menu – Settings – 2 – Live View Display – On/Off to a custom button?!?!?!
Very Very Annoying
If you have you A77 set to remember the last menu item you changed, that helps.
Thanks Frank, but I already have that set.
It is just an extra process every time I am working with flashes and ND filters… what a pain.
Sony should let us assign the movie button or the viewfinder button for that purpose.
I find it odd that you can’t assign any feature to any button, it’s only software.
While I am off topic, will Sony ever introduce a LOSSLESS file format???
Though I am pretty sure the LOSSY file format doesn’t matter much in terms of picture quality, it would be nice to offer the option to choose between both.
Overpriced!
The current price for Sony 50mm f/1.4 is $449.99. I don’t think it make sense if Sony set the price of Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 higher than $1,000.00
If Sony is serious about pushing Alpha Series camera & lens, Sony need to improve their lens lineup (Ultra-wide & Tele) and camera features (eg. mirror flip up mode).
For this price, the lens MTF better be pegged on the top of any chart I see…
I’ll buy, even if it was $2000. I have never regretted a penny I’ve put towards the expensive Zeiss/Sony lenses. I can buy this 50mm and be done with it.
If it’s a 1.2 might be worth that kind of change but a 1.4 at $1500 USD? No thanks.
I thought Sony was serious about entering the camera market. I will stick to my Canons and Zeisses at lower prices and with proper ergonomics, like everyone else.
Serious is not equal to cheap. If that’s the case, my paper disposable camera is very serious.
Stop moaning you arseholes, Sony is serving up incredible lenses. If you don’t want to pay big money for the Zeiss and are prepared to have a film-era design that vignettes like a bitch on FF you can buy the Sony 50/1.4.
It’s pointless comparing this lens with Canon, Sony Zeiss lenses out-perform all Canon L lenses, as do most Sony/Minolta lenses.
And stop talking about f1.2, these ultra-fast lenses were built in the film-era for brand kudos, not practical photography. They make even less sense in the digital era where the wafer-thin focus plane is immediately exposed and you can shoot at ridiculously high ISO if you need low light.
+1
No 50mm 1.4 or 1.2 is not a revolution. It’s 2 names for one price. Way over priced. It would only be worth it if for some reason it made the translucent mirror disappear as a negative. Or it was a 50mm f0.8 then it would worth more than what they have said in this rumor. It will only continue to erode sales of Alpha line. I thought in cam stabilization meant you could make lower priced lenses, but then we all complain that they are too low, what they have is not good enough. Sony could make there own lenses and get better feedback from there customers. Zeiss is nice, but everybody wants to afford them. Sony is great, but is a bone head too. Where the G 50 and the g 85.
Doesn’t should be in there. sorry.
I will buy it if the quality is as good as 135ZA
If this is true! Let’s just say. It would not be a choice for me. When the results I’m looking for is not with a 50mm lenses. This might be the Lenses for a crop Cam, but if I got A99 it would not a choice for me, given the price. 50mm is not all that impressive on a full frame. I’d pay the money for a distagon on a full frame. Maybe it’s a cream for nex full frame, but there’s not one to be found. yet!
If it was bundle with a lower price with the A99 or nex full frame it might bring Sony into the light, but by it’s self. I think it would be a hard sell.
I don’t understand all the complaining on here. This is an SR2 rumour with no rrp set yet and no way of judging price vs quality.
That must be the Hasselbald price.
Will it be 3 times the IQ of the Sigma 50/1.4? It’s 3 times the cost.
Personally, 50mm is a strange focal length. Not wide enough for landscape, not tight enough for portrait.
It will probably be a really great lens but will lots of people buy it? I doubt it.
I like 35 (e.g., the RX1) quite a bit for street photography, but I also like 50 for street photography. Both focal lengths are very good for every day photography.
I will hold on the 50mm until I see reviews. Maybe I was expecting too much from Sony by making it cheaper than the 24mm f/2.0 (Since 50mm lenses are easier to design compared to other lenses) But time will tell. I was also expecting a cheaper version of the a99, with less video features and more stilss but again, seems like I was expecting too much from them. The good thing is, weathersealing seems like the new standard on high end lenses from Sony or Sony-Zeiss colaboration.
This lens at this price point just as the new Sigma 35mm starts shipping is a really dumb move.
It’s just SR2. It won’t be $1500 unless Sony really wants to screw the A-mount user base
I don’t think the Sar Price is off much given the view of all that Sony has to offer. They Sell there 35 g lenses for $1,400 and Zeiss being higher respected, deserves and should command more for it’s value. The trouble is Sony does not along side Zeiss produce a G 50 at the same time. We should expect Sony to want to compare it’s self to a mighty Zeiss, but they don’t. Not much of a challenge from Sony. They disrespect themselves not by rising to the Challenge in the A mount. 50mm general should be less expensive, so why did Sony not make a deal with Zeiss for the challenge to see who can make the better lens. Not trying is failure. The have not made a 50g lens.
Where the 85g, or 135g. Why leave it to Zeiss to make your line valuable.
That is what disappoint me most about Sony. There cameras slt design I can except that design as is, but lenses are more important. Forget Minolta lenses. I think most people thought Sony would of done more with this line.
This is where all the trouble is.
Thats a crazy price. Thats adding nearly $1000 just for AF vs the manual focus. No way the lens guts cost more then the glass and coatings. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=zeiss+50mm+f1.4&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=
nnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo………… @_@
after i got myself a 135 4yrs ago and 24 a year ago… this would be my last zeiss… promise =(
probably for the next more years if this rumor is true… so Sony dont make my dream just a dream… huhuhu!
NOOOOO! instead I’d get a minolta rokkor mc pg 50 f1.4 for 50$… 🙂 and spend my 1450% left on a plane tickets
Initially, $1500 sounded expensive to me, but if the performance is near the announced 1.4/55 distagon, it may be quite a bargain. It depends on whether it is designed with 36mp+ sensors in mind.
$1500 would be a suicide. $1000-$1200 sound more reasonable.
+1
What a joke! Far far far too much
If the quality necessitates the cost I have no problem paying a premium price for a premium lens.
It sure would be nice, Andrea, if you offered a “members only” chat forum that required proof of dedication to the form to join, a place where truly serious artists and/or professionals could engage in mature, meaningful discussions about product. I have grown so tired of all the amateur, infantile rants that dominate these various threads. It seems that no matter where you go on the internet every discussion is almost immediately highjacked by trolls and haters who have no desire or ability to have a genuinely productive, meaningful discussion on anything even remotely resembling informed discourse.
+1
What is childish and infantile is attempting to force a group to be limited to your ideas and wishes only. Dictators do that, not civilized discussion groups. Go to Sony’s Flickr group that won’t even allow comparisons to other brands and see how it’s doing, how few “meaningful discussions” it has.
Walt… is that you in your photo? Reason I ask, is because I’ve been scanning my Woodstock 94 film and have come across a bloke that looks like you as a younger man. I immediately thought of you when I saw the shot. Were you there, at Woodstock 94?
“The eagle never lost so much time as when he submitted to learn of the crow.”
BTW, if you think most of the comments posted in these forums are civil you have a pretty warped concept of civility.
I merely asked for an alternative environment for serious shooters who would like a place where they don’t have to worry about having every thread and comment highjacked by cynical trolls (like you). I want to be able to discuss technical aspects and issues, not be bogged down by incessant mindless chatter that is big on criticism and wholly devoid of anything constructive. By all means, allow for an open forum where anarchy reigns; but why is it too much to ask to have an environment where an opinion has to be qualified by something more than a bad attitude and questionable skill? I’m not the one playing at bully tyrant nor am I the one advocating for less civility. Quite the contrary.
too bad it couldn’t be f1,2 like canon’s L version.
It won’t have the focus shift problems of the Canon/1.2. None of the ZA’s have focus shift. All the CaNikons do, even their fancy pants glass.